Strangers

Again, I find myself at odds with what may be the majority of the raters and reviewers here on IMDB. As I write this review, there are only 272 votes and a dismal 4.3 rating here on IMDB for this wonderful film Strangers. Mine is one of the first (if not the first) written review so my question is: If this movie is so bad, why aren't people reviewing it instead of just rating it poorly?

I think this film is really good. Not great, but really, really good. The entire cast, and I mean ALL the actors and actresses in Strangers did a great job. Jon Voight is superb as usual. The direction was spot on, the lighting, the sound, the sets, the scenery were all good. The locations were beautifully shot. This movie is a great exposé on how vulnerable people can be manipulated and taken advantage of. It displays the great danger and disadvantage in letting emotion overrule logic and reason.

The trailer almost spoils the "twist" near the end of the film but it doesn't completely give away all of it. The ending was not what I would have preferred and the ending may or may not be what you prefer but this is a movie worth watching....and probably more than once.

I wonder how many people have watched this movie, I have never heard of anyone in it, with the exception of Jon Voight. He does a good job, but we all know in Hollywood he is persona non grata due to his political beliefs.

Whatever.

This a movie review and sorry, it's just not a good one. The guy who plays the hit man is frankly just terrible. Not for a second did I believe in his character at all. I guess he was supposed to come across all mysterious and enigmatic, but he had the personality of a wooden coat hanger.

The female lead was a bit better, but terribly annoying and difficult to believe that she fell in love overnight and then went along with all that assassin nonsense at the drop of a hat.

What did she get out of it in the end?

The Strangers is a film by Tony Dean Smith that is a psychological metaphor for the possibility of the movement of delusional thoughts in the comparison of imagination and anxiety. These thoughts are not included in the logical and analytical circuit of relationships and are largely euphoric. Cinema does not need to psychologically rehabilitate them to show these thoughts, and by showing the hows, it can address the what and whys. Pay attention to the characters in the film: a woman who is addicted to paranoid thoughts in her emotional relationship with her husband, Sienna Guillory, takes refuge in the Hope Center and AA groups to escape the thoughts that are constantly killing her husband who raises his hand on her and these angers caused by the illness caused the loss of their child. An old man who, Jon Voight, sees his daughter's eyes and beauty in the woman in question, and the character of Jimmy Bamber, who goes to a recovery center due to excessive alcohol consumption and meets this woman. These characters are like a clock revolving around a woman who is suffering from mental problems. Problems that may be all that we see in the film, such as the opening sequence of the film where she kills her husband with a shotgun, are the creation of her sick mind. Cinema's job is to show problems with the language of storytelling and literature, so stories are a cover for such problems and...

Quite a study in madness as a young woman (Sienna Guillory) (Laura) who's failing marriage with a wife beater happens to meet a dashing young Englishman (Jamie Banber) (Sky) who also happens to be a well established hit man who does only jobs to remove the true cockroaches in this world. As she delves deeper into his world and romance, she becomes robin to his Batman until one last hit changes everything. Nothing questionable, lots of sexual situations, brief male rear nudity, the way they dispose of the bodies is rather creative, cremation. Quite a fascinating ride to say the least. Keeps you interested all the way through. John Voight is awesome as usual. Great plot, dialog, story. Makes one wonder if Laura becomes the new Batman. Enjoy!